tv On the Record With Greta Van Susteren FOX News December 10, 2014 4:00pm-5:01pm PST
thanks for inviting us into your home tonight. that's it for this special report. "unafra "unafraid" a special report online in seconds. i'm not sure about this. fox news channel's ed henry locks horns with the white house press secretary. it all started that ed pointed out that right now two former members of the bush administration are leading the cia and the fbi. now that is despite the democrats slamming the bush administration's endorsement of cia interrogation tactics. take a look. here's fox news chief white house correspondent ed henry grilling pressure secretary josh ernst. >> you're attacking bush administration policies but you have two of the architects of those policies serving in two of the moat -- endorsing a legal memo. >> i don't think that is a fair description certainly. >> john brennan is certainly in the bush administration as well. >> that's right. but i don't think it's fair at all to describe him as an architect. >> you don't see any contradictions with him endorsing the policies the
president is attacking and now serve in two -- >> the president of the united states has complete confidence in the professionalism of these individuals. he's got complete confidence that these two individuals who serve in important leadership positions on his national security team are following the law and doing everything that is necessary to protect the american people. the president is pleased with their service. >> ed henry joins us live. ed, it looks like you got a survey sound bite response to your questioning. >> greta, what i think is interesting is that the focus yesterday was on the bush administration, rightly so. because these policies played out back then. but today we saw this president's leadership come under scrutiny, not just at the white house briefing but surprisingly at a democrat in mark udall of colorado just lost his re-election, maybe freer to speak his mind. he said this president is not showing leadership on this issue. part of his anger is over john brennan, one of the officials i was pressing josh earnest about.
john brennan served at the cia under president bush, was a big supporter of these tough interrogation practices and continues to be now a cia director under president obama. and in fact, agrees more with perhaps with former vice president cheney than the current vice president biden or current president obama. because john brennan in the last 25 hours put out a statement saying these harsh tactics worked. they brought in good intelligence. and they helped prevent terror attacks. something this white house disagrees with. so there's a contradiction within the administration. a final point i'll make is, look, the president's also now facing some questions about the fact he's hitting bush administration policies over the rough handling of terror suspects, detainees, et cetera. but what is now coming under the microscope is what about this president's ramping up of the drone policies where you've seen thousands of innocent civilians taken out when the president is rightly targeting terrorists,
kills those terrorists but then neighbors, family members, also get killed. josh earnest told me, look, there's safeguards in place to protect these innocent civilians. but as you know, pakistan, yemen, various countries, we've seen a lot of innocent civilians killed. so look, bush war on terror policies are certainly under the microscope. but this president's policies are as well. >> ed, thank you. >> good to see you. also today former cia director is firing back against the senate democrat's claim that cia torture did not produce useful information. here's former cia director michael hayden. >> the report says we got nothing from this program. bill, no one involved in this program can even imagine how they got to that conclusion. >> these interrogations of all the detainees gave us kind of a home depot-like storage of information on al qaeda on which we relied, well, we're still relying on it today. >> and representative adam
kinsinger joining us. a lot of people seeming to think that enhanced interrogation is okay but torture is not. what is the difference? >> well, look. there's a legal definition and legal difference. obviously we don't believe in torture, and we shouldn't as a nation believe in torture. but when it comes to things like maybe sleep deprivation, in some cases these are tactics that may be employed. we use them on our own mill tit when they're training them. >> i don't quite understand that. apparent lit justification for using water boarding was that a legal memo came out of the justice department saying it's okay, right? >> mm-hmm. >> what in the world did a two lawyers at the justice department doing on this? what do the lawyers know? >> that's a problem we have with government all the time is congress makes laws and lawyers interpret it. >> and then they make the decision, apparently. >> the reality of it is this. we have to do whatever we have to do to protect our nation. if you think back to september 11th, 2001, america was caught
off guard by this horrific attack on our country. now all of a sudden americans were asking why weren't we protected? now the cia, these really good people that have to now unravel a terror network that's been intertwined in all kinds of countries and all kinds of areas now had to do what they had to do to rapidly get information. i don't think enhanced interrogation is something we need to rely on a lot at all. because i think we have very effectiven tear gags techniques in other ways we do it. but there may be a case in which we need rapid information quickly, for instance to protect the homeland in an attack. >> is there any reason why this can't be a debate in congress? why should this have been quiet and essentially been decided by a couch lawye a couple of lawyers at the justice department? >> i think at the time this was written up we were in the process of unraveling a terrorist network that we didn't realize how big it was. i think to bring a debate like that to congress would have been
very count produ very counter productive. i've been trained with some techniques in the air force and i can't talk about what they are. because we want to protect some of our ability to extract information. if you bring all that out in the public and go into detail it makes it less effective and americans can die. >> i hate to keep harping on this, but do you have a problem that the decision was made with lawyers at the justice department rather than apparently by the president of the united states or congress in concert with congress, the ideas the lawyers say it's okay. the lawyers say in a memo no one can tell the difference between enhanced interrogation and torture but two lawyers at the justice department can and make the decision for the rest of us? >> the president has to rely on a legal team to define things and to bring him recommendations. that's what happened in this case. but again reality as a country we should have a discussion. i don't think it's bad to have a discussion. but you can't come out and reveal everything that we do because it makes it less effective. this is a real serious situation. because there are american lives at risk. and i'm frankly upset at this -- the timing of this release of
this report. because now as you know, our embassies around the world are told to be on alert this. could very well lead to somebody being injured or killed. >> but we have no idea. everything is always a wild guess in this business. anyway, nice to see you. >> thanks. >> take a look at this. an interview about immigration getting heated when a fusion tv anchor calls president obama deporter in chief. >> as you were saying, you always have the legal authority to stop deportation. then why do you deport 2 million people? >> jorge, we're not going to -- >> you broke up many families, you were the deporter in chief. >> you called me deporter in chief. [ overlapping speakers ] >> let me say this, jorge. >> you could have stopped deportation. >> that is not true. listen. hire's the fact of the matter. as president of the united states, i'm always responsible for problems that aren't solved
right away. >> joining us our political panel, national journal reporter and weekly standards. susan, the deporter in chief by the anchor, have any problem with that? >> well, the deportation numbers are really one of the great misunderstood issues in america, i think. this 2 million number that we reached in april of 2014. it's not customs people or border enforcement going into people's homes and ripping out moms and dads and kids. a lot of the people counted in that big number are people at the border. people crossing over the border and are being turned right -- they're being seized right there on the border. so they're not people who are living here, who have established lives here. and in many cases, they're criminals who have been released because they have family members here. so he's sort of caught here. because in some waist administration wanted to make themselves look tough on deportations. and so they've made it look like look, we've been following the immigration laws. we haven't been breaking the immigration laws. on the other hand, a lot of
these numbers are really puffed up by turn arounds at the border an not by actual enforcement in the interior. >> lauren? >> i think this number really proves what a difficult spot the president was in when he was talking about immigration reform for a long time. he had to look tough on immigration in order to convince republicans in congress that he was doing enough at the border to get them to trust him and pass some kind of comprehensive immigration reform. of course, that hasn't happened. now president has sort of been in this weird position where he's had to go out of his way to have this executive order. and of course, that affected 5 million people which is far more than the 2 million that he claims to have deported. >> all right. i have a little different approach to it. i don't know john if you disagree with me or not. but look, i think the president's done a lousy job on immigration. the house and senate in the july of 2010 when he gave that speech on immigration at american university. i went up there and listened to it. i think he's done a lousy job to. call him deporter in chief was so insulting. he was president of the united states. i couldn't get past the interview.
i thought he was insulting the president. one thing to ask tough questions, it's insulting. >> it's insulting if you think he had to do this and he's following the law. >> deporter in chief? >> it's a point if obama is saying i didn't have the power to deport these people i should be held accountable. the house and 60 democrats in the senate. they had an overwhelming majority in the house. now they're blaming house republicans for not holding a vote? >> i'm not disagreeing with holding the president's feet to the fire and being tough on immigration the fact he did nothing in the house and senate after that speech. the president of the united states, you've got some person in the media saying deporter in chief. >> this isn't the first person that said that. people in the president's own party have called him that. >> i appeared on the show called between two plants or between two ferns? he has reduced a lot of the decorum in the office in some ways just by the nature of the interviews he chooses to go on.
that bothered me the least. >> people who have gone to these white house meetings called him deporter in chief then she was iced out. >> media has a job to hold the president's feet to the fire. but still he is the office of the president of the united states. when we in the media sort of flip and call you in your face when you're interviewing deporter in chief. i think it diminishes the whole discussion. >> it may. but i think the larger issue actually really is the confusion about who's being deported and who's not and how that plays into immigration reform. there's a lot of mystery there. and i think if jorge ramos put a spotlight on it by bringing up this 2 million -- [ overlapping speakers ] >> he could put a spotlight saying july 1st, 2010 you had the house and senate and went up to american university and promised you'd do all this immigration reform. you didn't do it. >> he did not come to the press conferences on the hill and ask
why it wasn't being done. >> the last word? >> i think the president here has a difficult job in the next year in selling -- >> made more difficult by his own problems. >> he's got to sell this immigration package that he just did unilaterally. i think that's going to be the toughest and most focused things he has to handle. >> facts can be hard. stay with us. we want to ask you about something we heard. former hhs secretary kathleen sebelius. but first is security at u.s. diplomatic posts any better now than before the benghazi terror attack? that was the topic today at the second benghazi select committee hearing. >> facts haven't changed. the evidence hasn't changed. but the way our government characterizes benghazi has changed a lot. >> we all take this assignment very seriously. >> fire, violence, terror, the weaponry of war. >> today we are safer and more
secure. >> one bad actor with the right position and access can seriously endanger the safety and security of personnel overseas. >> i do not think we should move on. >> and ben gau ze select committee chair joins us. nice to see you >> yes, ma'am. >> apparently because of the release of this memo, this torture memo or whatever you want to call it, we put our overseas fa sill tis on high alert. steve linnick the top watchdog for the united states said u.s. posts remain at increased security risks at diplomatic posts. in your work as chairman of the benghazi committee, are things safer? >> since benghazi, yes, ma'am, in a number of different ways they think are measurable. this notion of a temporary mission facility, the waiver process, appropriations, frankly, on the congressional side. i think you can easily make the
argument that we are better off than we were on september 10th of 2012. however, the purpose of the hearing today was to say there's still room to progress. and we need to continue to impress upon the state department it should be your highest priority. >> why was the state department in benghazi, anyway? why weren't the just in tripoli? >> that's a great question. jimmy jordan from ohio asked that question. that's frankly going to be the focus of our next hearing in january. i think folks would tell you that we have to be in dangerous places because you have to balance the policy with the risk and then determine the presence. but you can't debate risk versus policy if you don't know what the policy was. think back to the ben rhodes memo. blame it on the video not a failure of the policy. tell us what the policy was. that's what we're going to do in january. >> it seemed awfully peculiar. i don't know what was going on there. but the ambassador was there, sort of an unexpected trip or something. but that night, an hour or so
before his killing, he met with the turkish diplomat. do you know why he was meeting with a turkish diplomat? >> i've seen no evidence that the meeting with the turkish diplomat was in any way related to, well, what ultimately happened to the ambassador. >> was it related to why the state department and the cia had such a huge presence there? >> if there is any evidence to connect the two, i have not seen it. and no one on hipsi, house intel has told me about it. >> aren't you curious why he was meeting with the turkish diplomat? >> i'm curious why he was there. but i'm curious why we as a country were in benghazi. the ambassador loved libya. and he particularly loved the people of benghazi. we may ultimately find out there is no more nefarious explanation other than the fact that our ambassador loved the people of benghazi. so we're going to find out. but i've seen no evidence to suggest there was any nefarious reason for him to be in benghazi other than the fact he loved the country and the people and he
hadn't been there for awhile. >> i'm not suggesting nefarious. i'm suspicious because i haven't gotten a lot of information whether this was a covert operation. naturally i'm a little suspicious and he meets with the turkish diplomat and we never know why before he's killed. not suggesting turkey is up to no good but i don't think we have all the information. >> i think at the end of that analysis we're going to find that he and the turkish diplomat were friends. >> just friends. >> i know you and i live in a world where people want to find something that is harder to understand than just a simple fact that he loved the people there, he was friends with the turkish diplomat. keep in mind the night that they met, nothing was going on when they parted ways. >> all right. are you going to call susan rice, ambassador rice, and ben rhodes to testify? >> well, susan rice has to be called. she's never been called before a committee of congress to explain what role she played in the
drafting or the giving of the white house talking points. ben rhodes, as i read that memo again today, and i have not discussed it with mr. cummings. he and i have to consult with each other before any decisions are made. but that memo was pretty important to our understanding of how a false narrative was perpetrated to our fellow citizens. >> you want him. >> i want to talk to everybody who has access to relevant information. >> do you expect to call former secretary of state hillary clinton? >> i don't see how you can have any definitive accounting of benghazi without talking to the secretary of state at the time. >> so we expect hearings from january we'll see those three, at least they'll be requested their presence? >> we won't do those three in january. i need the remainder of the document production from the state department before i can interview secretary clinton. they've been cooperative and they've been helpful. but as you know with a really good lawyer, you can't examine anyone until you have all the documents. >> what's the problem get the documents to me. we've been talking about this now for two years and a couple months. your committee hasn't been
around that long. but what's the delay in getting the document? >> i think the state department would tell you we are good up until your most recent request. we have collimplied as you know >> they're square with you? >> they are making an effort to be cooperative. the timing issue we may work on a little bit. when lawyers look at documents it may lead them to make another request for production. if the state department were here they would tell you look quit asking us for more documents. we've given you what you wanted so far. but for us to be able to do the kind of job that you expect and the people who watch your show expect, we're going have to have access to the witnesses and the documents. sometimes that means lawyers decide late in the game i need this batch. so the state department has not been difficult for to us work with. and i don't expect that that will change. >> mr. chairman, nice to see you. >> you, too. former hhs secretary kathleen sebelius now suggesting
a quick fix to obama care. plus a college professor compares the tea party to the nazi party right in the middle of elections all caught on camera. you'll see it for yourself coming up. thank you for being my hero and my dad. military families are uniquely thankful for many things, the legacy of usaa auto insurance could be one of them. if you're a current or former military member or their family, get an auto insurance quote and see why 92% of our members plan to stay for life.
listen to this. former hhs secretary kathleen sebelius suddenly seems to know how to fix obama care. >> obama care, no question, has a very bad brand that has been driven intentionally by a lot of misinformation and a lot of paid advertising. and i think we may need to call it something in the future different. >> really? just change the name? our political panel is back.
john, a new name? >> i just think it's delusional. right now you're finally seeing some thawing among democrats like chuck schumer who are saying it's a bigger problem than this, a problem that doesn't help the middle class. if you think it can be fixed by changing the name name it after somebody popular, taylor swift or aaron rodgers. but it's what obama care does. it's what it is, the reality of it. by two to one people say the law has hurt them rather than helped them from the new fox poll. people losing their plans, paying more. losing their doctors. >> i think she means the misinformation about the past bill. but the misinformation that passed the bill. if you liston jonathan gruber lack of transparency. nobody knew knew it or read it. if if you want to keep your
doctor you can. state exchanges. misinformation that led to its passage. 400,000 people that they said got obama care to get over the 7 million mark. that turns out to be wrong, too. go ahead. >> i think one of the most difficult things about this for the president is that he is still talking and defending this law at a time in his presidency when it has completely overshadowed other priorities that he might have had. things like immigration. things that he could have been doing maybe working with republicans. but he has had to continue to put so much political capital into this. it's so similar to what chuck schumer said. look, maybe this shouldn't have been our first priority. >> there's a poll out tonight fox news poll about what should happen to the health care law. repeal the law last year 53% thought it should be repealed. that has now risen to 58%. >> more people want it repealed. i actually think it was a great name. >> obama care? >> yeah. it would have sealed obama's legacy as a signature achievement. and even on the campaign trail he was saying hey i kind of like
the name obama care. the problem is the bill really has fallen apart physically and in the eyes of the american people. that's the problem. that's why no one likes the name because it reminds them of a bill that's terrible. >> what would you name it? >> i came up with the name frankenstein fiasco. >> that's because it was a nearly dead bill and they had to sew and bolt it to the to get it to pass and it was sort of a mess. >> john, what would you have named it? >> i would leave that to someone much popular. name it after someone really popular. >> taylor swift? >> or aaron rodgers. democrats really haven't come to terms with what's wrong. even the ones acknowledging the problem we did this first it was the wrong timing or the web site. they need to realize they've got to fix the law. that's going to take a lot more than just rebranding -- >> a name only does so much. in kentucky the name connect is much more popular in polls than obama care. of course connect is the state's own version. >> what would you name it? >> i think connect maybe is the best place. that seems to be the most
popular we've seen. >> they tried affordable care act. that didn't work. >> if the bill worked the names would have been fine. panel, thank you. nice to see you. i like aaron rodgers. that's a good name, john. find out what senator paul this jonathan gruber should do for the americans he called stupid next. introducing the new philips norelco shaver series 9000 with contour detect technology that flexes in 8 directions for the perfect shave at any angle. go to philips.com/new to save up to $40. innovation and you. philips norelco. ing... a pm pain reliever that dares to work all the way until... the am. new aleve pm the only one to combine a safe sleep aid plus the 12 hour strength of aleve.
then boom... what happened? stress, fun, bad habits kids, now what? let's build a new, smarter bed using the dualair chambers to sense your movement, heartbeat, breathing. introducing the sleep number bed with sleepiq™ technology. it tracks your sleep and tells you how to adjust for a good, better and an awesome night. the difference? try adjusting up or down. you'll know cuz sleep iq™ tells you. give the gift of amazing sleep,
o'reilly here. "saturday night live" does not air a skit on the racial situation in ferguson but we vet and you'll see it. also the incredible story of a woman who once romanced elvis presley, kind of. now she's a catholic nun. next" factor." you don't need tt the energy that makes our lives possible. because we do. we're exxonmobil and powering the world responsibly is our job. because boiling an egg... isn't as simple as just boiling an egg. life takes energy. energy lives here. master stone waller or just
plain stupid? >> call it the stupidity of the american voter or whatever. but basically that was really really critical to getting the thing to pass. >> i'd like to begin by apologizing sincerely for the offending comments i've made. >> he said it again and again and again. >> american people are too stupid. >> i made mean and insulting comments uncalled for in any context. >> i frankly didn't think it could get worse. congratulations it got worse. >> clever exploitation of the lack of economic understanding of the american voter. >> likely you're going to be back here again. >> i'm extremely frustrated with dr. gruber's statements. >> counsel, we're going to have to serve a subpoena. >> i'm embarrassed and i'm sorry. but i'd rather have this law than not. >> senator rand paul joins us. good evening, sir. >> glad to be with you. >> okay. so he has apologized. but is there harm from what he did? not just what he said but in the whole sort of handling of this? >> i think rather than an apology he should return some of the money the taxpayers
forwarded to him. >> how much? first of all he didn't want to tell us how much. but estimates up to 6 million. >> yeah. and apparently on some of his disclosure forms he wasn't quite accurate rath with this so we need to look into that. i think an apology is not enough. basically if you're a consultant for government you're expected to be honest. he's now admitted and bragged about how dishonest he was in the presentation of this. he said the way to get it through is to trick the american people. by the way, his disdain for the american public is that they're so stupid i can trick them. i think really he shouldn't just apologize. i think he should return his paycheck. one of the things he said is that they deliberately had a cbo not score the mandate as a tax. and that was a big fight when the vote was on obama care. would that have made any difference if there wasn't this sort of shifty activity in calling it not a tax and it is a tax? >> maybe we should have informed justice roberts since he ruled on it as a tax. so yeah, it's a really kind of a
legalistic thing. but the whole obama care case turned on that justice roberts deciding it wasn't a penalty. it was a tax. it is a big deal. i frankly disagree with judge roberts. it's a huge mistake to think that we are going to presume that all laws are constitutional and give always the legislature the benefit of the doubt. i'm a big believer that the courts are there to try to protect natural liberty and to protect your rights and that we shouldn't always concede to majority rule. majorities can do really bad things sometimes. >> so what should be done? now we've got the situation where of course he says he's not the architect of obama care he's the architect of romney care. the obama administration is running from him. he's now said they were deceitful about the mandate. he's also said things about whether states that didn't set up the exchanges should get subsidy and tax credits. so is it all just no big deal? it's just a lot of noise? >> no, no, i think it is a big deal. i think dishonesty and being
paid for dishonesty there should be repercussions. we've asked the investigator general to look into this. i've written a letter to the investigator general and said we need to investigate. i'd also like to see his communications with the white house, frankly. the white house pretends as if they don't know who he is. and even though they've mentioned him by name in the past. he's been to the white house many times. i'd like to know about the communication. i'd also like to know did he use his position and did other people at the white house use their position to get him contracts? he made millions of dollars pedalling his false analysis to what, half a dozen state governments. >> but the same thing could happen. i always say the washington is a city of no consequence. we see billions of dollars being wasted in the city. now we seed a guy who's made a lot of money off obama care with a very sordid story behind it. i mean, are there really going to be consequences? how can we get consequences? >> i think some of the consequences were in the election. there was some response. gruber was a small part of it.
he didn't lose the election for all the democrats. but this building unhappiness with the president, limiting your choice to your doctor, all the limitations of obama care. then we find out it's a bunch of elitists who think we're all too dumb to figure this out that they tricked us and gave us obama care. it's insulting to most of us who live in middle america, who think that these elitists think that they're better than we are and they're going to give us stuff and it's going to be good fours and take it or else they'll give us a penalty or a tax as justice roberts calls it. >> former hhs secretary sebelius made a statement something to the effect that obama care one of its big problems was just simply the name of it. that has a bad connotation. it's a branding issue. >> yeah. but i think the president is sort of a brand. but he's a bad brand. but it's his baby. he came up with this concept. i think what hurt obama care is not the name. when the tide really shifted there were a lot of people had misgivings. but when people found out they couldn't keep their doctor. when you tell americans they can
no longer choose their doctor, that they have lost their freedom of choice, americans, we kind of want to decide what we want. we want it when we go to the grocery store, to the doctor. we want to be able to pick. that's sort of a fundamental american thing about our system. i think when we found out we couldn't choose our doctor, i think public opinion really turned against obama care. >> so what would you call it now? >> the lack of choice care. >> anyway, senator, thank you. >> thank you. and breaking news tonight for the first time we are hearing from three uva students, friends of the alleged gang rape victim jackie. they are telling the "washington post" their memories of the night in question differ from how "rolling stone" portrayed the incident. joining us "washington post" reporter taylor reed shapiro. tell me what you've learned. >> we learned tonight in the interviews i had with the the three students, their recollections of that evening are inconsistent in what was portrayed in rolling stone. for instance, they told me that in the immediate aftermath of the alleged attack, they tried to get help for jackie and even
sought out to speak with the police. >> does that suggest that something did happen but just that the version is incorrect? i mean, it could very well be that "rolling stone" journalist was shoddy journalism and something really did happen. >> they told me that when they found her that night that she was bawling, in absolute tears, hysterical. one of them told me they'd never seen anybody behave like that ever before in their life and they never wanted to see it again. they felt at that moment that she had been traumatized by something, something horrific. that is why they felt it was entirely necessary for them to seek out the authorities. >> what did they say she said that night? >> she had said at that moment that she had gone out on a date with a chemistry classmate and that it had ended at a fraternity where she was led inside and was forced to perform oral sex on five men. >> and where did their friends see her? did they see her outside the fraternity house or back at the dorm? where did they see her? >> they saw her about a mile
away from the fraternities, outside of a dorm. >> and have you been able to go back to see whether or not she dated some chemistry student that night? have you been able to sort of track down that clue? >> i've looked for this supposed chemistry student. the closest i came was a student who knew her back in high school but said that he'd not had any interaction with her for several years. >> did the three students you spoke to think she had been gang raped or something something else or had no idea what happened? >> they don't know what to believe. from the moment they first saw her they believe she was traumatized. after looking back on the events and learning new things through my own reporting, they now feel maybe differently. >> and you will continue to chase down the story as you have been. taylor, thank you very much. you've been doing a great job. thank you. >> thank you. and dangerous weather slamming the nation from coast-to-coast. meteorologist will be here to tell you what to expect and whether or not trouble is headed your way. he's here next. plus caught on camera.
college professor comparing the tea party to the nazi party. that's coming up. you get sick, you can't breathe through your nose suddenly, you're a mouth breather. a mouth breather! well, put on a breathe right strip and shut your mouth. cold medicines open your nose over time, but add a breathe right strip and pow, it opens your nose up to 38% more. so you can breathe and do the one thing you want to do, sleep. add breathe right to your cold medicine shut your mouth and sleep right. breathe right. and look for the calming scent of new breathe right lavender, in the sleep aisle.
hello... i'm an idaho potato farmer and our big idaho potato truck is still missing. so my buddy here is going to help me find it. here we go. woo who, woah, woah, woah. it's out there somewhere spreading the word about america's favorite potatoes: heart healthy idaho potatoes and the american heart association's go red for women campaign. if you see it i hope you'll let us know. always look for the grown in idaho seal. everyone has questions about money. you know, i think about money kind of a lot. -money's freedom. -money's always on my mind. credit cards. -mortgage. -debt. it's complicated. it's not easy. i'm not a good budgeter. unfortunately, i'm a spender. i would love to learn more about finances. so there's questions about the world that all of us have, especially about money and finance. the goal of khan academy and better money habits and the partnership we're doing with bank of america
is to give people the tools they need to empower themselves. come from all walks of life. if you have high blood sugar, ask your doctor about farxiga. it's a different kind of medicine that works by removing some sugar from your body. along with diet and exercise, farxiga helps lower blood sugar in adults with type 2 diabetes. with one pill a day, farxiga helps lower your a1c. and, although it's not a weight-loss or blood-pressure drug, farxiga may help you lose weight and may even lower blood pressure when used with certain diabetes medicines. do not take if allergic to farxiga or its ingredients. symptoms of a serious allergic reaction include rash, swelling or difficulty breathing or swallowing. if you have any of these symptoms, stop taking farxiga and seek medical help right away. do not take farxiga if you have severe kidney problems, are on dialysis, or have bladder cancer.
tell your doctor right away if you have blood or red color in your urine or pain while you urinate. farxiga can cause serious side effects, including dehydration, genital yeast infections in women and men, low blood sugar,kidney problems, and increased bad cholesterol. common side effects include urinary tract infections, changes in urination, and runny nose. ♪do the walk of life ♪yeah, you do the walk of life need to lower your blood sugar? ask your doctor about farxiga and visit our website to learn how you may be able to get every month free. i'm keeping my mom healthy! keepers, i'm keeping dad on schedule. i'm keeping my mom happy! comfort keepers in-home professional caregivers can provide meal planning and preparation, health and wellness services and personal care services through custom care plans that can change as needs change, so your aging loved ones can stay happy and healthy in their own home. ♪
this a fox news alert. severe storms hitsing from coast-to-coast. first a nor'easter slamming the east coast, and now west coast bracing for its worst storm in five years. fox news chief meteorologist rick reismuth. >> extremely big storms on the west coast, california dealing with the worst drought we've ever seen. we desperately need the rain. but in the long term this is good news. in the short term it's going to be a really rough number of days. we're going see some areas maybe this week see over 15 inches of rain. that means flooding concerns. this is going to be an incredibly windy storm. expect to see a lot of power outages by the time this is done. the rain moves all the way through southern california. even in southern california we'll see maybe 3 to 4 inch
rainfall totals. good news again in the long term, but in the short term all these areas looking at the flooding threat that goes across much of northern california. and then it's going to turn to be a very cold storm as well eventually. take a look at this. we're talking about blizzard warnings, greta. talking about winds maybe 60 to 80 miles per hour causing whiteout conditions across the passes. great news eventually for the ski areas but a rough couple of days ahead for california. >> indeed. rick, thank you. >> you bet. now to news that will make your blood boil. a government watchdog says last year the irs paid more than 6 billion, that's billion, in bow fuss child tax credits in 2013. and justin st. james joins us with more. how did this happen? >> it appears that people were either confused or deliberately making mistakes when they filled out their tax forms. almost 25%, a quarter of people who received the child tax credit probably shouldn't have based on this government report. and a big kind of reason that
this is going on i allowed to go on at least according to the irs their budget has been severely cut over the last few years. $850 million scaled back. >> 850 million? >> yes. >> they could have taken some of that 6 billion and we'd still be ahead by a lot. they'd fix their budget. >> they say they've got 13,000 people less than they did in 2010 looking and reviewing these returns. because of that there's been kind of this rampant abuse of the child tax credit. >> 6 billion is an incredible amount of money! it's just incredible, it's staggering! what's being put in place to recover it? i mean, like can't the taxpayers recover that? >> so part of that would be auditing. so you do need kind of people to be able to go through the returns and work their way through the process. but the irs is taking some steps. they have started to digitize these returns and evaluate them using algorithms to look in they are recovering more of the money than they were in the past they
say. there's some progress being made but incredible amount of money going out the door. >> we don't know how much is fraud and how much is mistake. >> exactly. in a lot of cases people are confused whether they can claim this credit, which is kind of intended for some poor families with children. so they're claiming as they would dependents. there's a lot of confusion. it's an argument about how complex the tax law is. another big kind of point here is that 60% of these kind of fraudulent cases are instances where people used tax preparers. they went into companies. so there could be room for the irs to crack down on the tax preparing companies. >> the fraud or the mistakes or both? >> we don't don't know if it's intentional or not. >> $6 billion. that's the irs for us. by the way, what's their attitude like? oh, well this, just sort of happens? or are they horrified? >> they want to bring in as much money as they can. at the same time they've defended this tax credit that's not susceptible to fraud before. >> justin, thank you. and this will make you wonder what's is going on in
college. a college professor telling his students that the tea party is like the nazi party. the controversial election tur caught on camera next. she inspires you. no question about that. but your erectile dysfunction - that could be a question of blood flow. cialis tadalafil for daily use helps you be ready anytime the moment's right. you can be more confident in your ability to be ready. and the same cialis is the only daily ed tablet approved to treat ed and symptoms of bph, like needing to go frequently or urgently. tell your doctor about all your medical conditions and medicines, and ask if your heart is healthy enough for sex. do not take cialis if you take nitrates for chest pain, as it may cause an unsafe drop in blood pressure. do not drink alcohol in excess. side effects may include headache, upset stomach, delayed backache or muscle ache. to avoid long term injury, get medical help right away for an erection lasting more than four hours. if you have any sudden decrease or loss in hearing or vision, or any allergic reactions like rash, hives, swelling of the lips, tongue or throat, or difficulty breathing or swallowing,
we're for net neutrality protection. now, here's some news you may find even more surprising. we're comcast. the only isp legally bound by full net neutrality rules. caught on camera, a south texas college professor comparing the tea party to the nazi party. >> in 1931, which was really interesting, the nazis, people are kind of tired of them. they have been around since 1920, 11 years now. they're like the tea party. such a good example. don't tell anybody i said that, though. the tea party are like the nazis, but in the sense of how they politically came to power, there's a good analogy there, that eventually people realize these nazis are a bunch of nuts,
these tea party people are a bunch of nuts. >> for more on this story, caleb bonham joins us. what do you think? >> if you have this south texas college professor, he tells the students i am about to liken the tea party to nazis, but don't tell anybody. so that didn't go so well for him, since we are talking about it on national news. he obviously didn't have the respect of his students, but this is outrageous. this is a completely shocking comparison to be giving in front of a captive audience and be forcing that down your students' throats. >> do you think anybody takes it seriously, i think of college and all the dopey things they said, i mean, it is college. >> it makes an impact when it happens time and time again, that's what we see at the leadership institute for campus reform. we saw it earlier when a professor said republicans are money grubbing misogynistic --
>> don't the students have enough critical thinking themselves that they go out, have coffee or beer and did you see what that goof said in front of the class? >> we would think the same of the northbound population of voting -- i think when college students are indoctrinated, when they're told reagan was a sexist and didn't appoint women to top positions they don't look into it and see that it is completely false. when a professor claims ted cruz is a horrible man, this professor went on an obscenity laced tirade against ted cruz, they wonder is there something there we're missing. and it makes an impact when it happens time and time again. >> fascinating to see these videos out of university. i've heard a lot of this stuff, you know. >> students are looking to stand up. >> and they are. i tell you, look, if i were a
college professor, i would be on notice times have changed. there's youtube, cell phones, you wouldn't hear any crazy stuff out of me. >> the interesting thing is we're talking about public officials having cameras to hold them accountable how they act. i am curious when cameras start in the classroom, to be sure they stay on subject and aren't indoctrinating kids like this. >> does he have tenure? >> it is community college. >> what's the answer to that. he works for the county or -- >> well, for the college there, and they have said they're investigating it, hopefully he's hearing from somebody soon. >> i assume he will say free speech, the ivory tower. >> that's what they hide behind, the idea of academic freedom. students have academic freedom, they have the freedom to go to class and not hear that the tea party is akin to the nazis. students will start to stand up and make sure universities give
them that freedom. >> i think they made their view known, whoever taped it. thank you. >> thank you. wait until you hear how i started my day, it is definitely not what you would expect. going to talk you about it. take you off the record. and watch hannity at 10:00 p.m. eastern. jorge ramos joins him. here's a question for you: if every driver in the u.s. kept their car's tires properly inflated, how many gallons of fuel could america save each year? up to 2 billion gallons? 4 billion? 6 billion? the answer is... up to 4 billion gallons.
then boom... what happened? stress, fun, bad habits kids, now what? let's build a new, smarter bed using the dualair chambers to sense your movement, heartbeat, breathing. introducing the sleep number bed with sleepiq™ technology. it tracks your sleep and tells you how to adjust for a good, better and an awesome night.
thousands of children running for their lives, fleeing president assad using chemical weapons against them and isis, who kills anyone that doesn't agree with them. that refugee camp is tough, bitter cold, kids with no winter clothing, walking barefoot in the snow and hungry. fast forward today. what a pleasure to meet up with franklin graham at the tarmac of the baltimore airport. he loaded a 747 with 60,000 operation christmas child. >> these shoe boxes are like snowflakes. it goes to children that are refugees, children that have lost everything. >> what a difference. on one hand, isis and assad, on the other, americans with giant hearts. and that's my off the record comment tonight. thanks for being with us. see you tomorrow night here at 7:00 p.m. eastern. if you can't watch live, use your dvr. don't forget that. follow me on twitter, @greta.
go to gretawire.com. should department of justice decide whether torture is enhancing interrogation or not? o'reilly factor is on tonight. >> i never heard from anybody whatever you guys do about this terrorism threat, please, please don't overreact. >> the cia striking back at the senate torture report released by democrats. a very intense media debate under way. we will have the inside story. >> any fair minded person looking at this would say that some terrible mistakes were made. >> but president obama's own cia chief, john brennan, says the torture report is not accurate. how embarrassing is that? >> he walks into the office, meets mr. elvis presley. said how do you do,